Jump to content

General Subway/RT Discussion


FlyerD901

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Turtle said:

Yes, the fastest stretches are Lawrence to York Mills northbound, Sheppard to York Mills southbound, and Finch to North York Centre southbound. They can get up to 79km/h easily there. Some operators claim they can get a TR up to 81 km/h without an eb, and get pretty upset when you mention to them that either speed control or the onboard train systems should have stopped the train at 80. People like to embellish.

How fast did the H5's go on those sections?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

How fast did the H5's go on those sections?

I think the issue is uphill. The TR's are very slow going uphill. Especially between York Mills and Sheppard. 

I think the H1's where the fastest. Either that or it was because of the lack of insulation.

Have the schedules stayed the same since the 90's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

How fast did the H5's go on those sections?

Don't know, they didn't have speedometers. They were governed to max speeds similar to the T1s which have a speedometer. Some trains were faster than others, or rolled better. It's really hard to say, because a lot of the speed through there is from going downhill, not from the max speed that propulsion still works. The T1s and H5s were governed to somewhere around 62km/h in parallel, don't know the exact speed. A TR cuts propulsion at 78km/h, but doesn't really have much acceleration above 55.

 

So a short answer, is probably the same as the TRs do now downhill, uphill is a different story...

25 minutes ago, Shaun said:

I think the issue is uphill. The TR's are very slow going uphill. Especially between York Mills and Sheppard. 

I think the H1's where the fastest. Either that or it was because of the lack of insulation.

Have the schedules stayed the same since the 90's?

Eglinton to Lawrence northbound it gets above 70km/h. York Mills to Sheppard northbound, a TR will maintain 44km/h, where a T1 would do around 50km/h if I remember correctly. H5 if working correctly would feel slightly faster than a T1, but can't confirm that. With the amount of traffic on the line, top speed is irrelevant now.

 

They added some time to the schedules recently. It helps.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Turtle said:

Don't know, they didn't have speedometers. They were governed to max speeds similar to the T1s which have a speedometer. Some trains were faster than others, or rolled better. It's really hard to say, because a lot of the speed through there is from going downhill, not from the max speed that propulsion still works. The T1s and H5s were governed to somewhere around 62km/h in parallel, don't know the exact speed. A TR cuts propulsion at 78km/h, but doesn't really have much acceleration above 55.

 

So a short answer, is probably the same as the TRs do now downhill, uphill is a different story...

Eglinton to Lawrence northbound it gets above 70km/h. York Mills to Sheppard northbound, a TR will maintain 44km/h, where a T1 would do around 50km/h if I remember correctly. H5 if working correctly would feel slightly faster than a T1, but can't confirm that. With the amount of traffic on the line, top speed is irrelevant now.

 

They added some time to the schedules recently. It helps.

But with a simple programming change they can make the TR's faster going uphill. One would think that it would allow you to increase the northbound capacity by moving more people in the same amount of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Turtle said:

Don't know, they didn't have speedometers. They were governed to max speeds similar to the T1s which have a speedometer. Some trains were faster than others, or rolled better. It's really hard to say, because a lot of the speed through there is from going downhill, not from the max speed that propulsion still works. The T1s and H5s were governed to somewhere around 62km/h in parallel, don't know the exact speed. A TR cuts propulsion at 78km/h, but doesn't really have much acceleration above 55.

 

So a short answer, is probably the same as the TRs do now downhill, uphill is a different story...

Eglinton to Lawrence northbound it gets above 70km/h. York Mills to Sheppard northbound, a TR will maintain 44km/h, where a T1 would do around 50km/h if I remember correctly. H5 if working correctly would feel slightly faster than a T1, but can't confirm that. With the amount of traffic on the line, top speed is irrelevant now.

 

They added some time to the schedules recently. It helps.

Wouldn't it have been possible for an H5 to go above 80, since they weren't limited to 80 unlike the T1s and TRs (though I've heard stories of the TR reaching over 85)? I remember being on an H6 that reached 86 eastbound towards Old Mill, and 87 westbound towards Warden. I wonder why the H6s got the digital speedometers added but the H5s didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Shaun said:

But with a simple programming change they can make the TR's faster going uphill. One would think that it would allow you to increase the northbound capacity by moving more people in the same amount of time. 

Sure they could do that I guess, but the thing limiting capacity up there right now is traffic. It doesn't matter how fast it can operate, when they wait in line to get to the ends. Traffic also slows them down in the core where the stations are closer together.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

Wouldn't it have been possible for an H5 to go above 80, since they weren't limited to 80 unlike the T1s and TRs (though I've heard stories of the TR reaching over 85)? I remember being on an H6 that reached 86 eastbound towards Old Mill, and 87 westbound towards Warden. I wonder why the H6s got the digital speedometers added but the H5s didn't.

85km/h in a TR is impossible. They apply emergency brakes at 80km/h. 78km/h propulsion cuts out. 79ish you get an overspeed warning, 80km/h it stops. Then you have speed control warning you at anything above 76km/h, and speed control applying emergency brakes at 80. That's two completely separate systems on the train causing an eb. The TRs have always done this, no way anything above 80 is possible without the train stopping.

 

I've heard the stories of H6's doing 85km/h. I've been on T1s that the speedometer was reading above 80. Those analogue speedometers had an adjustment screw that some people messed with, so the calibration could have been off. Wheel size (worn down) could change the reading in a car too.

 

Lets just say the operators hitting those speeds are doing something they aren't supposed to. No way can a TR hit 85km/h unless it you dropped it from an airplane. The only time a TR has ever seen speeds above 81km/h is when it was on the flatbed being delivered from Bombardier. (I say 81 because it takes about a second for the air brakes to apply)

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MK78 said:

Heh, I remember when the Scarborough RT was running at 80km/h. Used to peek in the cabs and see the speedo. I think on their best day they max out at 60 now.

They used to really move it between Kennedy and Lawrence East as soon as they got clear of the 90 degree turn coming down from the station and again between Lawrence East and Ellesmere.  The TTC has tested out various combinations of maximum speed and acceleration and braking rate profiles on the line to try and make it a little bit more reliable and last a little bit longer though and some performance has been traded off.  The political pressure to keep it running must be immense because I can’t imagine anybody wants to be the person responsible for removing a rapid transit line from the subway map.   Giving up on the CLRVs and busing streetcar lines is not a powder keg like that which is why you didn’t see a whatever-it-takes approach to those compared to the RT.

1 hour ago, Turtle said:

Yes, the fastest stretches are Lawrence to York Mills northbound, Sheppard to York Mills southbound, and Finch to North York Centre southbound. They can get up to 79km/h easily there. Some operators claim they can get a TR up to 81 km/h without an eb, and get pretty upset when you mention to them that either speed control or the onboard train systems should have stopped the train at 80. People like to embellish.

I’m sure people do like to embellish and it’s like a fishing story.  Depending on the instrumentation though and how it’s all put together, especially if the subsystems gather there own separate speed data, a one km/hr discrepancy between 81 when the train should bail at 80 might be within the realm of possibility.  I can name transit vehicles where the ATO/ATC box receives its own speed data from a separate set of sensors from the train’s controller box and they sometimes aren’t in exact agreement. Different sized wheels between trucks being one cause.  It’s the age old instrumentation conundrum.  If you have one clock, you know what time it is.  If you have two, you wonder which one’s right.

Anyways, the run down from Finch was better before North York Centre opened.  Trains would come barreling down to Sheppard and if it was an eight car Gloucester, a trailing cloud of brake dust would waft down into the station following the train.

1 hour ago, Turtle said:
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2020 at 10:23 PM, Wayside Observer said:

Anyways, the run down from Finch was better before North York Centre opened.  Trains would come barreling down to Sheppard and if it was an eight car Gloucester, a trailing cloud of brake dust would waft down into the station following the train.

On the subject of that, did the construction of NYC involve reconstruction of the profile of the tracks & tunnel to make the track within the new station perfectly level (since the stretch from Finch to Sheppard is mostly downhill), which I imagine would make the whole project that much more complicated? Or was the profile already horizontal within that 150-m section of the tunnel to begin with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 63 Ossington said:

From what I have read there were provisions for a future North York Centre Station when constructing the line; ie a roughed-in section which I would imagine including a leveled stretch of track.

Yes, there was a long section of level straightaway that was provided to accommodate the future station when the north Yonge extension was built.  It was neat riding through there when the station itself was being added as the construction went through different phases.  At one point the platform area hand been hollowed out and was lit up with dim strings of those construction lights with bulbs in wire cages and trains crawled through slowly.  The view from the front corner seat on a Gloucester train was great because it was on the side platform side of the train and you could twist to look out either the front or side window and it looked for all the world like an abandoned station when it was at that stage.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So after yesterday’s moving of T1s over to Line 1 and back, I’m still somewhat confused how ATC compatibility works. So is the TTC able to turn off ATC between St. George and St. Andrew while they move trains over? I’m still confused about whether or not in emergency situations the TTC is able to revert back to block signalling or not. If not, what’s the plan if something happens at Wilson Yard or anywhere south of the yard and trains can’t go into service? For example yesterday they would have had to have shuttles running b/w St. Clair W and Union and more to supplement the Yonge Line as well, which seems quite excessive considering the amount of extra T1s sitting around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

So after yesterday’s moving of T1s over to Line 1 and back, I’m still somewhat confused how ATC compatibility works. So is the TTC able to turn off ATC between St. George and St. Andrew while they move trains over? I’m still confused about whether or not in emergency situations the TTC is able to revert back to block signalling or not. If not, what’s the plan if something happens at Wilson Yard or anywhere south of the yard and trains can’t go into service? For example yesterday they would have had to have shuttles running b/w St. Clair W and Union and more to supplement the Yonge Line as well, which seems quite excessive considering the amount of extra T1s sitting around. 

The new signalling system also has a limited capability to allow trains that are not ATO equipped to operate over it. Much like the old signal system, it has blocks which are delineated by signals. The difference is that instead of each block being the approximate length of one train, each block is now much, much longer. If the signal system detects a non-equipped train in the block, it will prevent anything else from entering until it has cleared.

 

So yes, you can run the T1s on the portion of the YUS that is ATC-equipped. But because the blocks are so long, the distance between trains becomes long too, and so it becomes extremely problematic to try and run revenue service like that.

 

As for why they didn't run trains up on the University section of the line, that was because they simply didn't have enough equipment to. There were only 14 trains available on Yonge - the derailment occurred before any of the service trains could go through - and so the decision was made to focus the service on Yonge. Even with the 5 T1 sets, that's only 19 trains - and realistically they need more like 27.

 

The other thing to consider is that even though they may have lots of equipment lying around, they may not have enough crews for all of it. A lot of YUS crews are not (or no longer) cleared to operate the T1s, just like a lot of B-D operators are not cleared for TRs. Those 5 trains on the YUS came from somewhere, and it was likely that most or all of them were regular BD service trains.

 

Dan

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, smallspy said:

As for why they didn't run trains up on the University section of the line, that was because they simply didn't have enough equipment to. There were only 14 trains available on Yonge - the derailment occurred before any of the service trains could go through - and so the decision was made to focus the service on Yonge. Even with the 5 T1 sets, that's only 19 trains - and realistically they need more like 27.

 

The other thing to consider is that even though they may have lots of equipment lying around, they may not have enough crews for all of it. A lot of YUS crews are not (or no longer) cleared to operate the T1s, just like a lot of B-D operators are not cleared for TRs. Those 5 trains on the YUS came from somewhere, and it was likely that most or all of them were regular BD service trains.

 

Dan

I don't think they would run non equipped trains in service. Plus, the derailment happened on the southbound track south of St. George at the turnback switch. Even if they did choose to run a couple trains on that section of the line, there wasn't a place where they could easily turn back southbound.

 

Why they didn't turn back the trains from Spadina instead of St. Clair West I don't know, it's possible they had to cut power down there while they were re-railing the work car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks @smallspy for the great explanation. One more question is what would the approximate cost or feasibility of equipping 5 or 6 T1 trains with ATC equipment and having those trains run in regular B-D service and be able to run on the YUS if needed? Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky? Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky? Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

Had the derailment been slightly further south near Museum ... or anywhere south of there, even ATC-equipped trains would not have been able to get through.

There's going to be situations where everything goes down. Sure, could throw some $ to cover some of these contingencies. But it won't cover a lot of situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Turtle said:

Why they didn't turn back the trains from Spadina instead of St. Clair West I don't know, it's possible they had to cut power down there while they were re-railing the work car.

No easy place to get people onto and off of the trains down there. Neither Dupont nor Spadina really have the capacity to handle those kinds of passenger loads, and the roads are not really well suited for it, either.

 

Kind of the same situation when the central portion of the B-D shuts down. Even though they run the trains out to Chester, the station isn't capable of handling the crowds, so they offload at Pape. (Although it could and should be argued that Pape doesn't really have the platform/stairway/mezzanine capacity, either. But that's another discussion.)

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Thanks @smallspy for the great explanation. One more question is what would the approximate cost or feasibility of equipping 5 or 6 T1 trains with ATC equipment and having those trains run in regular B-D service and be able to run on the YUS if needed?

The development cost is the same regardless of whether its one train or all 59, so why bother limiting it to only a small subset of equipment?

 

And considering that the T1s are getting close to the twilight of their careers, it's hard to make a justifiable business case for it - and especially if it only for situations that only arise a handful of times a year.

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky?

What is riskier is designing a system to handle both equipped and non-equipped trains equally. That was the TTC's original plan, and after 3 years of work all they had to show for it was some new signals and circuits around Union Station.

 

If the revenue equipment is going to be kept separate - as it has for much of the past 50+ years - you're better off keeping the systems independent as well. No sense in needlessly complicating things.

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

As has been the case since the opening of the Wilson Yard in 1978. Not really much that can be done.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, smallspy said:

No easy place to get people onto and off of the trains down there. Neither Dupont nor Spadina really have the capacity to handle those kinds of passenger loads, and the roads are not really well suited for it, either.

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though Spadina's not accessible.

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nfitz said:

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though it's not accessible.

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

I was thinking the same thing. Plus it’s direct access to the 510 or one stop to Bathurst (511) to go south as well and takes the pressure off the 512 to get to the Yonge Line. They could have added more streetcars to the 510 and 511 to head south instead of to the 512. If they were able to do that but also run the shuttles from St. Clair West to Union as they did I don’t see why not. It must have been the power shut down. 
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, nfitz said:

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

 

Don't know, I'm only guessing by what people told me (rumours) and which switch was clamped when service resumed through there.

 

The switch that was clamped is on the southbound track, on the crossover south of St. George at the turnback location where they would turn a southbound train back northbound. Don't know what happened, how it happened, or how it was possible to have happened. My opinion is worthless and unqualified here, but I don't think we will hear the real cause. My guess is human error, but not something the work car crew did.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nfitz said:

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though Spadina's not accessible.

Infinitely worse. That corridor is not a place where you want to have thousands and thousands of people funnel down. Hundreds sure, but not trainloads.

 

Quote

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

The workcar was northbound on the southbound track south-east of St George, and was transiting the crossover to the northbound track.

 

I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe that they have updated all of the power cut and traction power feeds on that stretch to allow them to shut down individual stations without affecting the neighbouring stations.

 

Quote

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

I doubt it. The rest of the station layout isn't changing.

 

3 hours ago, Turtle said:

The switch that was clamped is on the southbound track, on the crossover south of St. George at the turnback location where they would turn a southbound train back northbound. Don't know what happened, how it happened, or how it was possible to have happened. My opinion is worthless and unqualified here, but I don't think we will hear the real cause. My guess is human error, but not something the work car crew did.

Regardless of what the cause is, two derailments affecting service in almost as many weeks doesn't look good on the TTC - especially since the time between derailments on the system has traditionally been measured in years, not days. One way or the other, not only do they need to figure out what the cause was of this derailment, but also to appear to take steps to resolve it.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, smallspy said:

Infinitely worse. That corridor is not a place where you want to have thousands and thousands of people funnel down. Hundreds sure, but not trainloads.

 

The workcar was northbound on the southbound track south-east of St George, and was transiting the crossover to the northbound track.

 

I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe that they have updated all of the power cut and traction power feeds on that stretch to allow them to shut down individual stations without affecting the neighbouring stations.

 

I doubt it. The rest of the station layout isn't changing.

 

Regardless of what the cause is, two derailments affecting service in almost as many weeks doesn't look good on the TTC - especially since the time between derailments on the system has traditionally been measured in years, not days. One way or the other, not only do they need to figure out what the cause was of this derailment, but also to appear to take steps to resolve it.

 

Dan

So even with bi-directional running, they couldn't navigate trains around it so that they could be put into service on the Yonge side? Was the work train blocking the whole crossover? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd think the safety risks of running a train through a crossover that's even partially occupied by unmovable equipment far outweigh the benefits. What if the derailment was caused by a misaligned switch and you derail a second train through the same crossover as a result?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...